Living to 120 and Beyond

Transcription

1 AUG. 6, 2013 Living to 120 and Beyond Americans Views on Aging, Medical Advances and Radical Life Extension FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis Lugo, Director Alan Cooperman, Deputy Director Cary Funk, Senior Researcher Erin O Connell, Associate Director, Communications Sandra Stencel, Associate Director, Editorial 1615 L St, N.W., Suite 700 Washington, D.C Tel (202) Fax (202)

2 2 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK

3 3 LIVING TO 120 AND BEYOND About the Pew Research Center s Religion & Public Life Project This report was produced by the Pew Research Center s Religion & Public Life Project. Launched in 2001 as the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, the Religion & Public Life Project seeks to promote a deeper understanding of issues at the intersection of religion and public affairs. The project conducts surveys, demographic studies and other social science research to examine a wide range of issues concerning religion and society in the United States and around the world from shifting religious composition to the influence of religion on politics to the extent of government and social restrictions on religion. The project also covers a range of issues that often have a religious component from abortion and same-sex marriage to stem cell research and church-state controversies. The Religion & Public Life Project is directed by Luis Lugo and is part of the Pew Research Center, a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world. The center conducts public opinion polling, demographic studies, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research does not take positions on any of the issues it covers or on policy debates. This report is a collaborative effort based on the input and analysis of the following individuals: Primary Researcher Cary Funk, Senior Researcher, Pew Research Center s Religion & Public Life Project Pew Research Center s Religion & Public Life Project Luis Lugo, Director Alan Cooperman, Deputy Director Research David Masci and Greg Smith, Senior Researchers Jessica Hamar Martinez, Research Associate Editorial Sandra Stencel, Associate Director, Editorial Tracy Miller, Copy Editor Michael Lipka, Assistant Editor

4 4 Communications and Web Publishing Erin O Connell, Associate Director, Communications Stacy Rosenberg, Digital Project Manager Liga Plaveniece, Communications Associate Joseph Liu, Web Producer Pew Research Center Alan Murray, President Paul Taylor, Executive Vice President Elizabeth Mueller Gross, Vice President Andrew Kohut, Founding Director Scott Keeter, Director of Survey Research Diana Yoo, Art Director Adam Nekola, Web Developer Susannah Fox, Associate Director, Pew Research Center s Internet & American Life Project Visit to see the online version of the report. Pew Research Center s Religion & Public Life Project 1615 L St., NW, Suite 700 Washington, D.C Phone (202) Fax (202) Pew Research Center

5 5 LIVING TO 120 AND BEYOND Table of Contents Preface 7 Overview 9 Chapter 1: Awareness, Desirability, Implications and Predictions 19 Chapter 2: Views on Radical Life Extension, by Religious Affiliation, Beliefs and Practices 27 Chapter 3: Views About Aging 31 Chapter 4: Views About Today s Medical Treatments and Advances 37 Chapter 5: Personal Life Satisfaction 43 Chapter 6: Radical Life Extension and Views on Other Life Issues 47 Chapter 7: Race, Ethnicity and Views About Medical Treatments and Radical Life Extension 51 Appendix A: Survey Methodology 55 Appendix B: Question Wording and Survey Topline 61 PAGE

6 6 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK

7 7 LIVING TO 120 AND BEYOND PREFACE While the Pew Research Center routinely tracks long-established trends in public attitudes, it also tries to identify emerging social, political and religious issues. We began polling on samesex marriage, for example, in 1996, seven years before Massachusetts became the first state to allow it. The goal of these early studies is to set down some initial markers that may help us, years down the road, to look back and measure the amount and direction of change in public opinion on evolving issues. The idea for the forward-looking survey reported in these pages goes back to summer 2010, when David Masci, a senior researcher at the Pew Research Center s Religion & Public Life Project, interviewed a range of scientists, bioethicists and other experts about technological changes that could set off ethical and religious debates. Among the possibilities they raised was radical life extension, the prospect that advances in biotechnology and other fields could slow down or turn back the biological clock and allow many humans to live to 120 years or beyond. Some religious leaders, Masci found, already were discussing the possibility of much longer life spans. In 2010, for example, Pope Benedict XVI spoke against the desire to postpone death indefinitely, warning that endless life on Earth would be no paradise. The issue also has slowly seeped into public consciousness via movies, books and the news media. It is a great leap, however, to go from discussing a hypothetical scientific breakthrough to polling the U.S. public about it. To begin to explore what Americans think about radical life extension, the Religion & Public Life Project conducted two pilot studies, involving a total of more than 500 telephone interviews, in fall These tests broached the topic of scientific developments that might, in the future, allow an average person to live decades longer than is usual today. Respondents were asked to say, in their own words, what thoughts came to mind when they considered this possibility. Cary Funk, a senior researcher at the Pew Research Center who has extensive experience in polling about science and related issues, used the open-ended responses to develop a series of more specific questions on topics such as overpopulation and economic inequality. Pew Research also experimented with Google Consumer Surveys, using the internet to test the effect of specifying that medical advances might allow people to live past the age of 120. All these tests helped us to refine the survey questionnaire, which was fielded in spring 2013 on landlines and cell phones among a nationally representative sample of more than 2,000 adults. Together with the survey results, we are releasing two accompanying reports. To Count Our Days: The Scientific and Ethical Dimensions of Radical Life Extension presents an overview of the scientific research and the emerging ethical debate. Religious Leaders Views on Radical

8 8 Life Extension describes how some clergy, bioethicists, theologians and other scholars think their religious traditions might approach the issue. Funk was the principal researcher on the survey, and Masci was the principal writer of the companion reports. He received valuable help in from Elizabeth A. Lawton, a former research assistant at the Religion & Public Life Project. Leah Christian, formerly a senior researcher at the Pew Research Center, also contributed to the survey. Fieldwork for the survey was ably carried out by Princeton Survey Research Associates International. Luis Lugo, Director Alan Cooperman, Deputy Director Religion & Public Life Project Pew Research Center

9 9 LIVING TO 120 AND BEYOND OVERVIEW With falling birthrates and rising life expectancies, the U.S. population is rapidly aging. By 2050, according to U.S. Census Bureau projections, one-in-five Americans will be 65 or older, and at least 400,000 will be 100 or older. 1 Some futurists think even more radical changes are coming, including medical treatments that could slow, stop or reverse the aging process and allow humans to remain healthy and productive to the age of 120 or more. The possibility that extraordinary life spans could become ordinary life spans no longer seems far-fetched. A recent issue of National Geographic magazine, for example, carried a picture of a baby on its cover with the headline: This Baby Will Live To Be 120. Yet many Americans do not look happily on the prospect of living much longer lives. They see peril as well as promise in Who Wants To Live Decades Longer? biomedical advances, and more think it would be a bad thing than a good thing for society if people lived decades longer than is possible today, according to a new survey by the Pew Research Center. Would not want Asked whether they, personally, would They, personally choose to undergo medical treatments to Most people slow the aging process and live to be 120 or more, a majority of U.S. adults (56%) say no. But roughly two-thirds (68%) think that most other people would. And by similarly large margins, they expect that radically longer life spans would strain the country s natural resources and be available only to the wealthy. % of U.S. adults saying (they personally/most people) would or would not want medical treatments that slow the aging process and allow the average person to live decades longer, to at least 120 years Would want Source: Pew Research Center survey March 21-April 8, Q45, Q46. Responses of those who did not give an answer are not shown. There is, at present, no method of slowing the aging process and extending average life expectancies to 120 years or more. But research aimed at unlocking the secrets of aging is under way at universities and corporate labs, and religious leaders, bioethicists and philosophers have begun to think about the morality of radical life extension, according to two accompanying reports released by the Pew Research Center s Religion & Public Life Project in conjunction with the new survey. 1 See U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division. December Table 2. Projections of the Population by Selected Age Groups and Sex for the United States: 2015 to 2060 (NP2012-T2).

10 10 The survey, conducted from March 21 to April 8, 2013, among a nationally representative sample of 2,012 adults, examines public attitudes about aging, health care, personal life satisfaction, possible medical advances (including radical life extension) and other bioethical issues. The telephone survey was carried out on cell phones and landlines, in all 50 states, with an overall margin of error for the full sample of plus or minus 2.9 percentage points. 2 The findings suggest that the U.S. public is not particularly worried about the gradual rise in the number of older Americans. Nearly nine-in-ten adults surveyed say that having more elderly people in the population is either a good thing for society (41%) or does not make much difference (47%). Just 10% see this trend as a bad thing. Americans also appear to be generally optimistic as they look toward their own futures, including old age. Most say they are satisfied with the way things are going in their lives today (81%) and expect that 10 years from now their lives will be even better (56%) or about the same (28%). Younger adults are particularly optimistic, but even among Americans ages 65 and older, fully two-thirds expect their lives to be better (23%) or about the same (43%) in another decade. And while about a fifth of all U.S. adults (18%) say they worry a lot and 23% say they worry a little about outliving their financial resources in retirement, more than half (57%) say they either do not worry too much about this or do not worry about it at all. Asked how long they would like to live, more than twothirds (69%) cite an age between 79 and 100. The median ideal life span is 90 years about 11 years longer than the current average U.S. life expectancy, which is 78.7 years. 3 Ideal Length of Life % saying their ideal life span is U.S. adults 78 or under Source: Pew Research Center survey March 21-April 8, Q14. Responses of those who did not give an answer not shown. The public also is optimistic that some scientific breakthroughs will occur in the next few decades. For example, about seven-in-ten Americans think that by the year 2050, there will be a cure for most forms of 2 For more details on the survey methodology, see Appendix A. 3 Average life expectancy from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Table 18 in Health, United States, 2012: With Special Feature on Emergency Care, National Center for Health Statistics.

11 11 LIVING TO 120 AND BEYOND cancer (69%) and that artificial arms and legs will perform better than natural ones (71%). And, on balance, the public tends to view medical advances that prolong life as generally good (63%) rather than as interfering with the natural cycle of life (32%). But there also is some wariness about new medical treatments. Only a quarter (24%) of adults say they have a lot of confidence that new medicines and treatments have been carefully tested before becoming available to the public. About half (54%) agree with the statement that medical treatments these days are worth the costs because they allow people to live longer and better-quality lives, but 41% disagree, saying medical treatments these days often create as many problems as they solve. Views of Radical Life Extension Views of Radical Life Extension % saying medical treatments that slow the aging process and allow the average person to live decades longer, to at least 120 years old, would be a good thing or a bad thing for society The survey seeks to provide a glimpse into people s initial thoughts and considerations Bad for society on a subject radically U.S. adults longer human life spans that could emerge as a public issue in the future. But measuring opinion about scientific breakthroughs that may or may not come to pass is difficult. Only 7% of respondents say they have heard or read a lot about the possibility that new medical treatments could in the future allow people to live much longer; 38% say they have heard a little about this possibility, and about U.S. adults half (54%) have heard nothing about radical life extension prior to taking the survey. Since the scientific breakthroughs are uncertain and the public does not know much about this field, the wording of the survey question focuses on the result much longer life spans and is deliberately vague about how, exactly, this would be achieved Good for society Source: Pew Research Center survey March 21-April 8, Q43. Responses of those who did not give an answer are not shown. Likelihood the Average Person Will Live to at Least 120 Years Old % saying this will or will not happen by the year 2050 Will not Will Source: Pew Research Center survey March 21-April 8, Q21a. Responses for definitely/probably will happen and definitely/probably will not happen are combined. Responses of those who did not give an answer are not shown.

12 12 At this early stage, public reaction to the idea of radical life extension is both ambivalent and skeptical. Asked about the consequences for society if new medical treatments could slow the aging process and allow the average person to live decades longer, to at least 120 years old, about half of U.S. adults (51%) say the treatments would be a bad thing for society, while 41% say they would be a good thing. But most doubt that such a breakthrough will occur anytime soon. When asked about the future likelihood of the average person in the United States living to at least 120 years, nearly three-quarters (73%) say it either probably or definitely will not happen by the year Just a quarter of adults (25%) consider it likely to happen by The public also is skeptical about the fairness of these kinds of potential medical interventions. An overwhelming majority believes that everyone should be able to get these treatments if they want them (79%). But two-thirds think that in practice, only wealthy people would have access to the treatments. Most Americans also foresee other negative implications. About two-thirds agree that longer life expectancies would strain our natural resources and that medical scientists would offer the treatment before they fully understood how it affects people s health. And about six-in-ten (58%) say these treatments would be fundamentally unnatural. What Would a Future with Radical Life Extension Look Like? % of U.S. adults who agree /disagree with each statement Everybody should be able to get treatments Only wealthy would have access Medical scientists would offer before fully understood health effects Longer life would strain natural resources Treatments would be fundamentally unnatural Economy would be more productive Disagree Agree Source: Pew Research Center survey March 21-April 8, Q47b-h. Responses of those who did not give an answer are not shown

13 13 LIVING TO 120 AND BEYOND Opinion is more divided over whether our economy would be more productive because people could work longer; 44% agree, while about half (53%) reject this idea. Views on the likely impact of radical life extension on society vary somewhat by age, race and ethnicity. Blacks and Hispanics are more likely than whites to see radical life extension as a positive development for society. And younger adults are more inclined than those 50 and older to say that radical life extension would be a good thing for society. But there are few differences in opinions across other social and demographic groups. Men and women are about equally likely to say that radical life extension would be a good thing for society. There are only modest differences across education and income groups, with those who have less formal education and lower incomes somewhat more inclined to say radical life extension would be a positive development for society. Attitudes Toward Aging and Medical Advances Older adults account for a growing share of the U.S. population. Roughly 41 million Americans are 65 and older, and they make up about 13% of the total U.S. population, up from 4% in The growth in the share of older people in the population over the past century stems from dramatic advances in public health and medical care as well as steep declines in fertility rates. The share of the population that is 65 and older is growing at a faster pace than other age groups, fueled primarily by the aging of the nation s 76 million baby boomers. The new Pew Research survey finds that the public views this trend in American society as more positive than negative. About four-in-ten (41%) adults consider having more elderly people in the population a good thing for society. Just 10% say this is a bad thing, and 47% say it doesn t make much difference. More Elderly People in the Population % saying this trend is a good thing/bad thing or doesn t make much difference for American society U.S. adults Good thing Doesn't make difference Bad thing Source: Pew Research Center survey March 21-April 8, Q7e. Responses of those who did not give an answer are not shown. 4 Figures are from the U.S. Census Bureau population estimates and Pew Research Center population projections. Also see the June 2009 Pew Research Center report Growing Old in America: Expectations vs. Reality.

14 14 The overall average life expectancy in the U.S. at present is 78.7 years, although women tend to live longer (81.0 years) than men (76.2 years). 5 Given the option, most Americans would choose to live longer than the current average. Fully 69% of American adults would like to live to be 79 to 100 years old. About 14% say they would want a life span of 78 years or less, while just 9% would choose to live more than 100 years. The median ideal life span is 90 years. Younger adults, to Ideal Life Span by Age Group % saying they would like to live to the age of U.S. adults and older or under Median 19 Source: Pew Research Center survey March 21-April 8, Q14. Other responses and responses of those who did not give an answer are not shown. whom old age may seem far away, are more likely than those 65 and older to give an ideal age of 78 years or less (19% vs. 6%). The median ideal life span of adults under 30 at 85 years is lower than that for older adults. Relative to whites and Hispanics, blacks are especially likely to say they would choose a longer life span (median of 94 years). But whether respondents are male or female, their median ideal life span is roughly the same. And there are no significant differences in the median ideal length of lifetime by education Average life expectancies from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Table 18 in Health, United States, 2012: With Special Feature on Emergency Care, National Center for Health Statistics.

15 15 LIVING TO 120 AND BEYOND Public views of medical treatments today are largely positive, though not without reservations. About two-thirds of adults (63%) say medical advances that prolong life are generally good because they allow people to live longer, while about threein-ten (32%) say medical advances are bad because they interfere with the natural cycle of life. Further, 54% of adults believe that medical treatments these days are worth the costs because they allow people to live longer and betterquality lives, while 41% say that these treatments often create as many problems as they solve. Attitudes About Medical Advances % of U.S. adults saying Medical advances that prolong life are generally good... Medical treatments these days are worth the costs... [Radical life extension] would be good thing for society Source: Pew Research Center survey March 21-April 8, Q22d, Q8, Q43. Other responses not shown Overall attitudes about medical treatments are, not surprisingly, closely related to views about the likely effect of medical treatments that would radically extend the life span of human beings. Those who see medical advances in generally positive terms are also more inclined to view radical life extension as a good thing for society, and vice versa. Differences by Religious Group There are mostly modest differences among religious groups in their views on medical advances in general. Majorities of all large U.S. religious groups consider medical advances that prolong life as generally good. 6 About half or more of adults in all the major religious groups also say that medical treatments these days are worth the costs because they allow people to enjoy longer, better-quality lives. About six-in-ten white mainline Protestants (62%) and white (non-hispanic) Catholics (59%) hold this view, compared with about half of white evangelical Protestants (50%) and black Protestants (52%). About half or more of Hispanic Catholics (53%) and the religiously unaffiliated (55%) also say that medical treatments these days are worth the costs. 6 The religious groups that are large enough to be analyzed separately in this survey are white evangelical Protestants, white mainline Protestants, black Protestants, white (non-hispanic) Catholics, Hispanic Catholics and the religiously unaffiliated. The survey s respondents also include members of many smaller U.S. religious groups, and their views are reflected in the results for the overall public. But the numbers of Hispanic Protestants, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus and other religious minorities in the survey sample are insufficient to allow them to be analyzed and reported separately.

16 16 However, there is a different pattern across religious groups when it comes to attitudes about the possibility of slowing the aging process and radically extending life. Black Protestants are among the most likely to say radical life extension would be a good thing for society (54% do so). By contrast, fewer white evangelical Protestants (34%) and white Catholics (31%) say the same. Hispanic Catholics (44%) are more likely than white Catholics (31%) to think that much longer life spans would be a good thing for society. Among the religiously unaffiliated, 43% say radical life extension would be good for society, and 51% say it would be bad for society. About fourin-ten (41%) white mainline Protestants say radical life extension would be a good thing, while 52% say it would be a bad thing for society. Views About Medical Treatments and Radical Life Extension, by Religious Group % saying Medical advances that prolong life are generally good Medical treatments these days are worth the costs Radical life extension would be a good thing for society U.S. adults White evang. Prot White mainline Prot Black Prot White Catholic Hispanic Catholic Unaffiliated Source: Pew Research Center survey March 21-April 8, Q22d, Q8, Q43. Other responses not shown.

17 17 LIVING TO 120 AND BEYOND Predicting Views of Radical Life Extension While only a minority of U.S. adults have heard about the possibility of radical life extension, those who report having heard at least a little about it are relatively more inclined to see it in a positive light. And those who expect scientific developments to dramatically increase average life spans in the next 40 years also are more inclined to view radical life extension as good for society and to say they personally would want life-extending treatments. The survey contains a number of null findings that may be surprising. It turns out, for example, that many standard measures of religious beliefs and practices, including belief in God and frequency of attendance at religious services, are related to views on radical life extension only weakly, if at all. Nor is there a strong relationship in the survey between the gender, education or political party identification of respondents and what they say about longer human life spans. At least one question that deals directly with death, however, is correlated with views on radical life extension. People who oppose the death penalty are more inclined to say that longer life spans would be good for society. Beliefs about medical advances in general also are predictive of where people stand: those who think medical advances are generally good are more likely to view radical life extension in positive terms and to say that they personally would want life-extending treatments. Perhaps most intriguing, there is an association between race and ethnicity and views about radical life extension, with blacks and Hispanics more inclined than (non-hispanic) whites to favor radical life extension for themselves as well as for society as a whole. There may be many, overlapping reasons for these differences. Blacks and Hispanics tend to hold distinctive views on a number of questions that are correlated with views about radical life extension, such as having higher expectations that such scientific breakthroughs will come to pass by the year 2050 and being more inclined to see the growth of the elderly population as good for society. The survey cannot provide a definitive explanation for these racial and ethnic differences. For an overview of how some black Protestant leaders and other clergy are approaching the issue, see Religious Leaders Views on Radical Life Extension.

18 18 Roadmap to the Report The rest of this report details the survey s findings on radical life extension and related attitudes toward aging, medicine, personal life, religion, and moral and social issues. The first section looks at Americans initial thoughts about the desirability and impact of radical life extension. The second section covers views on radical life extension by religious affiliation, beliefs and practices. The third section looks at the public s views on aging in general. The fourth section explores attitudes toward medical treatments available today and the relationship of those attitudes to the public s views on radical life extension. The fifth section looks at personal life satisfaction as it relates to attitudes about longevity. The sixth section considers the morality of some social issues including views on abortion, stem cell research and the death penalty and how those views are related to the public s early thinking about the possibility of radically longer life spans. The seventh section provides an overview of the similarities and differences across racial and ethnic groups on views about radical life extension and beliefs about aging, medicine and personal life. What s the Science Behind Radical Life Extension? And What s the Religious Debate? In the last 200 years, advances in medicine, nutrition and public health have substantially increased human life spans. These increases have been achieved largely by helping infants and children to live to adulthood rather than by pushing the boundaries of human aging past their known limits. Today, however, scientists at major universities, research institutions and corporate labs are investigating a number of potential ways to slow down or turn back the natural clock of human aging, including growth hormone treatments, natural or drug-induced starvation diets and genetic therapies that seek to reduce or reverse the effects of aging. So far, none of these approaches has proven to be clearly effective in humans, but together they give a sense of the possible avenues ahead. For an overview of the scientific research and the emerging moral and religious debate over the possibility of much longer life spans, see the accompanying report, To Count Our Days: The Scientific and Ethical Dimensions of Radical Life Extension. For brief descriptions of how some major U.S. religious traditions might approach the issue, based on interviews with clergy, bioethicists and other scholars, see Religious Leaders Views on Radical Life Extension.

19 19 LIVING TO 120 AND BEYOND CHAPTER 1: AWARENESS, DESIRABILITY, IMPLICATIONS AND PREDICTIONS Most Americans have heard little or nothing about biomedical advances that, according to some researchers, hold the potential to allow the average person to live decades longer. Just 7% of U.S. adults report having heard or read a lot about this possibility, which medical researchers and bioethicists call radical life extension. Nearly four-in-ten Americans (38%) say they have heard or read a little about this subject, but the majority of those surveyed (54%) say they have heard nothing about it. Awareness of Radical Life Extension % of U.S. adults saying they have heard or read A lot 7 A little 38 Nothing at all 54 Don t know * 100 Source: Pew Research Center survey March 21-April 8, Q42. Figures may not add to 100% due to rounding. At this early stage, Americans on the whole are both ambivalent and skeptical about dramatic increases in longevity. Asked about the societal impact of new medical treatments that would slow the aging process and allow the average person to live decades longer, to at least 120 years old, about half (51%) of the general public says the treatments would be a bad thing for society, while 41% say they would be a good thing. Those who have heard at least a little about radical life extension are closely divided in their views: 46% say such treatments would be a good thing for society, and 47% say they would be a bad thing. Those who have heard nothing about it prior to the survey interview are more inclined to see radical life extension as a bad thing (56%) than a good thing (38%) for society. Opinion About Radical Life Extension, by Awareness % saying treatments to extend life by decades would be U.S. adults Heard a lot/little Bad for society Good for society Heard nothing Source: Pew Research Center survey March 21-April 8, Q43. Responses of those who did not give an answer are not shown.

20 20 Opinions about the possible impact of radical life extension on society tend to vary by age, race and ethnicity. Blacks and Hispanics are more likely than whites to see dramatically longer life spans as a positive development for society. And younger adults (ages 18 to 49) are more inclined than older generations to say that radical life extension would be a good thing for society. Opinion About Radical Life Extension, by Demographics % saying treatments to extend life by decades would be a good thing or a bad thing for society U.S. adults Men Good thing Bad thing DK But there are only modest differences across education and income groups, with Women White those who have less formal education and lower incomes being somewhat more Black inclined to say that radical life extension Hispanic would be a good thing for society and older Education College grad Some college H.S. or less Family income $75,000 or more $30,000-$74, Under $30, Source: Pew Research Center survey March 21-April 8, Q43. Figures may not add to 100% due to rounding. Whites and blacks refer to single-race-only groups who are not Hispanic; Hispanics are of any race.

21 21 LIVING TO 120 AND BEYOND Personal Interest in Having Treatments To Live Much Longer When asked whether they, personally, would want medical treatments that slow the aging process and allow them to live decades longer, to at least 120 years old, about four-in-ten U.S. adults (38%) say they would, while more than half (56%) say they would not. By contrast, about seven-in-ten (68%) speculate that most people would want such treatments, while roughly a quarter (27%) say most people would not want them. Who Would Want Treatments To Radically Extend Life? % of U.S. adults saying would or would not want treatments to extend life by decades They, personally Most people Would not want Would want Source: Pew Research Center survey March 21-April 8, Q45, Q46. Responses of those who did not give an answer are not shown. 68 Not surprisingly, personal desire for life-extending treatments is closely related to views about their overall effect on society. Of those who say such treatments would be a good thing for society, 71% say they personally would want to receive them. Conversely, the overwhelming majority (83%) of those who think such treatments would be a bad thing for society say they personally would not want medical treatments to slow the aging process and live decades longer.

22 22 There are some, mostly modest, differences in preferences among demographic groups. For example, men are somewhat more inclined than women (43% vs. 34%) to say they would want medical treatments that dramatically lengthen their lives. Also, blacks (46%) and Hispanics (46%) are more likely than whites (34%) to say they would want such treatments. There are also modest differences by age: Adults ages 50 and older are less likely than younger Americans to say they would want treatments to radically increase their longevity (34% vs. 42%). Differences by education level are not statistically significant. Desire for Radical Life-Extending Treatments % saying they personally would or would not want treatments to extend life by decades Would Would not DK U.S. adults =100 Among those who say radical life extension is Good for society =100 Bad for society =100 Awareness of radical life extension Heard a lot/little =100 Heard nothing =100 Men =100 Women =100 White =100 Black =100 Hispanic = = = = and older =100 High school grad or less =100 Some college =100 College grad or more =100 Source: Pew Research Center survey March 21-April 8, Q45. Figures may not add to 100% due to rounding. Whites and blacks refer to single-race-only groups who are not Hispanic; Hispanics are of any race.

23 23 LIVING TO 120 AND BEYOND Expected Effects on Society Americans hold a range of beliefs about the societal implications of medical treatments to slow the aging process and increase average life expectancy by decades. About eight-in-ten U.S. adults (79%) agree that these kinds of treatments should be available to everyone who wants them. At the same time, two-thirds (66%) expect that only wealthy people actually would have access to these treatments. Implications of Radical Life Extension for Society Two-thirds also think % of U.S. adults who agree or disagree with each statement that medical scientists would offer Disagree Agree the treatments before Everyone should be able to get treatments they fully understood the health effects and Only wealthy would have access that longer life Medical scientists would offer before fully understood health effects expectancies would Longer life would strain natural strain natural resources resources. In Treatments would be fundamentally unnatural addition, a majority of adults surveyed Economy would be more productive (58%) say that these treatments would be fundamentally unnatural. But public opinion is more closely divided when it comes to the effect of radical life extension on the economy; 44% say that our economy would be more productive because people could work longer, while 53% disagree. Source: Pew Research Center survey March 21-April 8, Q47b-h. Responses of those who did not give an answer are not shown.

24 24 Beliefs about these specific implications go hand-in-hand with assessments of the overall impact of longer life spans on society. For example, people who think that radically lifeextending medical treatments would be a good thing for society are more likely to agree that everyone should have access to them and less likely to view them as fundamentally unnatural. The strongest correlation is between overall assessments of whether radical life extension would be good or bad for society and the more specific question about the impact of longer life expectancies on the economy. Seven-in-ten Americans who think radical life extension would be good for society agree that the economy would be more productive because people could work longer. By contrast, only a quarter of those who say that radical life extension would be bad for society think the economy would be more productive. Beliefs about Radical Life Extension, by Overall Views % of U.S. adults who agree with each statement among those who say radical life extension would be a good thing or bad thing for society Economy would be more productive Treatments would be fundamentally unnatural Longer life would strain natural resources Only wealthy would have access to these treatments Everyone should be able to get treatments Medical scientists would offer before understood health effects Good for society Bad for society Expectations for the future also are closely tied to overall views Source: Pew Research Center survey March 21-April 8, Q47b-h. Responses of those who disagree and those who did not give an answer are not about the effect of radical life shown. extension on society. Those who say that radically longer life spans would be a good thing for society are more inclined to think that by the year 2050, the average person in the U.S. will live to at least 120 (38% of this group says it definitely or probably will happen). Among those who see life extension as a bad thing, by contrast, just 16% believe this scenario will come to pass by the year

25 25 LIVING TO 120 AND BEYOND What Are the Odds? The Pew Research survey asked respondents to gauge the likelihood that four developments in science and technology will come to fruition by the year Predictions About the Future % of U.S. adults saying each development will or will not happen by the year 2050 Artificial arms and legs will perform better than natural ones. There will be a cure for most forms of cancer. Scientists will bring back an extinct animal species by cloning it. The average person will live to at least 120 years. 73 Will not Source: Pew Research Center survey March 21-April 8, Q21a-c,e. Responses for definitely/probably will happen and definitely/probably will not happen are combined. Those who did not give an answer are not shown. Americans largely agree that by 2050 artificial arms and legs will perform better than natural ones (71%) and that there will be a cure for most forms of cancer (69%) Will The public is almost evenly split in their predictions on whether scientists will bring back an extinct animal species by cloning it, with 50% saying this will happen by 2050 and 48% saying it will not. Of the four developments considered, the public is most skeptical about radical life extension. Overall, only a quarter of U.S. adults say that by 2050 the average person in the U.S. will definitely or probably live to be at least 120 years old; 73% say this definitely or probably will not happen.

26 26 Those who have heard at least a little about medical treatments to extend life by decades are more optimistic that such a development is likely (35% say it definitely or probably will happen by 2050, compared with 18% of those who have heard nothing about the treatments). Similarly, those who say radical life extension would be good for society are more likely than those who say it would be a bad thing to think that average life expectancy will be at least 120 years by 2050 (38% vs. 16%). And those who say they personally would want such treatments are more likely than those who would not want them to predict that this scenario actually will occur by 2050 (39% vs. 16%). How Likely Is It That the Average Person Will Live To Be At Least 120 Years Old? % saying this will or will not happen by 2050 U.S. adults Heard a lot/little Heard nothing Good for society Bad for society Would want Will not Among those who say radical life extension is Will Among those who have heard about radical life extension Among those who would or would not want treatments Would not want Source: Pew Research Center survey March 21-April 8, Q21a. Responses for definitely/probably will happen and definitely/probably will not happen are combined. Those who did not give an answer are not shown.

27 27 LIVING TO 120 AND BEYOND CHAPTER 2: VIEWS ON RADICAL LIFE EXTENSION, BY RELIGIOUS AFFILIATION, BELIEFS AND PRACTICES Interviews with religious leaders and bioethicists reveal a range of thoughts about how their religious traditions might react to a world that could include radical life extension, but the Pew Research survey finds only modest differences of opinion on the topic among large religious groups in the general public today. (For thoughts from leaders and theologians from different religious traditions on the subject of radical life extension, see Religious Leaders Views on Radical Life Extension. ) Black Protestants are among the most likely to say radically longer life spans would be a good thing for society. About half of black Protestants hold this view (54%), compared with about four-in-ten white mainline Protestants (41%) and about a third of white evangelical Protestants (34%). (There are not enough Hispanic Protestants in the survey sample for separate analysis.) Views on Radical Life Extension, by Religion % saying treatments to extend life by decades would be Good thing Bad thing DK U.S. adults =100 Protestant =100 White evangelical =100 White mainline =100 Black Protestant =100 Catholic =100 White Catholic =100 Hispanic Catholic =100 Unaffiliated =100 Attend worship services Weekly or more =100 Monthly/Yearly =100 Seldom/Never =100 Belief in life after death Yes, believe =100 No, do not =100 Belief in God Yes, believe =100 No, do not =100 Hispanic Catholics are more likely than white (non-hispanic) Catholics to think that much longer life spans would be a good thing for society (44%, compared with 31% among white Catholics). The views of religiously unaffiliated Americans are similar to those of the public as a whole, with 43% of the unaffiliated saying radical life extension would be good for society and 51% saying it would be bad. Source: Pew Research Center survey March 21-April 8, Q43. Figures may not add to 100% due to rounding. The patterns by religious group are in keeping with those by racial and ethnic groups. Regardless of religious affiliation, blacks and Hispanics are more likely than whites to see radical life extension as a good thing for society.

28 28 In most cases, there is no significant correlation between respondents religious beliefs and practices and their views about the effects of radical life extension on society. For example, people who say they attend religious services at least once a week do not tend, on the whole, to take a more (or less) positive view of radical life extension s possible impact on society than do people who attend worship services less frequently. The same is true of the importance that people attach to religion in their lives, their self-reported frequency of prayer, whether or not they believe in God or a universal spirit, and their belief in heaven and hell none of these measures are significantly associated with views about the effect of radical life extension on society. However, there is a modest association between belief in life after death and opinions about the overall effect of radical life extension. Among U.S. adults who believe in life after death, 43% say radical life extension would be a good thing for society while 49% say it would be a bad thing. Among those who do not believe in life after death, the balance of opinion tilts more negative; 37% say radical life extension would be good for society while 58% say it would be bad. Personal Desire for Life-Extending Treatments, by Religion % saying they would/would not want treatments to extend life by decades Would want Would not DK U.S. adults =100 Protestant =100 White evangelical =100 White mainline =100 Black Protestant =100 Catholic =100 White Catholic =100 Hispanic Catholic =100 Unaffiliated =100 Attend worship services Weekly or more =100 Monthly/Yearly =100 Seldom/Never =100 Belief in life after death Yes, believe in =100 No, do not =100 Belief in God Yes, believe in =100 No, do not =100 Source: Pew Research Center survey March 21-April 8, Q45. Figures may not add to 100% due to rounding. White evangelical Protestants are among the least likely to want treatments to live much longer lives; 62% say they would not want them, while 28% say they would. And about half or more of white Catholics (59%) and white mainline Protestants (56%) say they personally would not want to receive treatments to radically extend their own life expectancy. But black Protestants are divided, with 47% saying they would want the treatments and an equal portion saying they would not. Hispanic Catholics also are closely divided, with 46% saying they would want such treatments and 47% saying they would not.

29 29 LIVING TO 120 AND BEYOND Those who attend religious services once or twice a month or a few times a year are a bit more likely than either those who attend more often or those who attend seldom or never to say they would want to radically extend their life spans. The relationship between worship service attendance and personal preferences for treatment is more pronounced among white evangelical Protestants and white Catholics. Among adults in these two religious groups, those who attend services less frequently are more inclined to want medical treatments that would slow the aging process and extend life expectancy by decades. For example, among white evangelicals who say they attend services at least once a week, 22% say they would want treatments to live decades longer, compared with 40% of those who attend services less often. There are few differences in personal preference for receiving life-extending treatments based on other religious beliefs and practices, including the importance of religion in people s lives, frequency of prayer, belief in life after death, belief in God or a universal spirit, and belief in heaven or hell.

30 30 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK

31 31 LIVING TO 120 AND BEYOND CHAPTER 3: VIEWS ABOUT AGING The Pew Research survey asked Americans a number of questions designed to explore basic attitudes toward aging in today s world, including their views on the ideal life span and their opinions on the impact of the growing share of the U.S. population that is 65 and older. Survey interviewers asked respondents these questions before the concept of radical life extension was mentioned. The answers subsequently were analyzed to explore links that might help to explain respondents views on radical life extension. Average life expectancy in the U.S. today is 78.7 years, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 7 Most Americans say they would like to live longer than that, but relatively few indicate that they would want to live for the prolonged time span associated with radical life extension. When survey respondents To What Age Would You Like To Live? are asked in an open-ended % saying they want to live to age fashion how long they would 78 or or like to live, nearly seven-inten less more DK (69%) give an age between 79 and 100 years. Roughly one-in-ten (9%) say they would like to live to more than 100. A small U.S. adults = minority of U.S. adults (14%) say they would like to live to no more than 78 years. The median ideal life span is 90 years. Median age Source: Pew Research Center survey March 21-April 8, Q14. Open end. Figures may not add to 100% due to rounding. Median age based on those who gave a response. 7 See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Table 18 in Health, United States, 2012: With Special Feature on Emergency Care, National Center for Health Statistics.